 Rehabilitation Act (colleges/universities that receive federal financial assistance).  ADA Title II (public colleges/universities).  ADA Title III (private colleges/universities).  U.S. Department of Education (OCR) has enforcement jurisdiction under the Rehabilitation Act and Title II of the ADA.  U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has enforcement powers under both statutes and Title III original jurisdiction.

[U]niversities agreed not to purchase, require, or recommend use of…any…dedicated electronic book reader…unless or until the device is fully accessible to individuals who are blind or have low vision, or the universities provide reasonable accommodation or modification so that a student can acquire the same information, engage in the same interactions, and enjoy the same services as sighted students with substantially equivalent ease of use...

OCR issued a Dear Colleague Letter and a questions-and- answers document (FAQ) to provide further clarification.  The Dear Colleague Letter states that the educational institution must ensure that students with disabilities can access the educational opportunity and benefit with “substantially equivalent ease of use” as students without disabilities. Should the educational institution use a device that is not fully accessible, the institution must provide “accommodations or modifications that permit [students with disabilities] to receive all the educational benefits provided by the technology in an equally effective and equally integrated manner.”

 Makes it clear that students with disabilities, especially visual impairments, are to be afforded “the opportunity to acquire the same information, engage in the same interactions, and enjoy the same services as sighted students.”  Further clarifies that an accommodation or modification that is only available at certain times (such as an aide to read to the student) will not be considered “equally effective and equally integrated” where other students have access to the same information at any time and any location, as is the case with a website or other on-line content.  Makes it clear that on-line programs are also covered and stresses the importance of planning to ensure accessibility from the outset.

University violated the ADA by using a version of an online learning product that was inaccessible to a blind student. The student’s lack of access to the course materials persisted nearly one month into the University quarter, at which point the student was so far behind in his coursework that he felt compelled to withdraw from the course. The settlement also resolves allegations that in a subsequent course, the same student was not provided accessible course materials for in- class discussion or exam preparation in a timely manner.

 The University violated Title II of the ADA by using a version of an online learning product that was inaccessible to a blind student.  The student’s lack of access to the online learning product persisted nearly one month into the University quarter, at which time the student felt that he was so far behind in his studies and coursework that he was compelled to withdraw from the course.  In a subsequent course, the same student was not provided accessible course materials for in-class discussion or exam preparation in a timely manner.  The delay in providing the student with the course materials prevented the student from having the same opportunity that students without disabilities had to participate in the class session and to study and prepare for the exam.

 “…the University must implement a policy that requires the deployment of accessible technology and course content in the University setting.  Ensure that all technology, including websites, instructional materials and online courses, and other electronic and information technology for use by students or prospective students, is accessible.”  Adopt a number of disability-related policies, including the requirement to deploy learning technology, web pages and course content that is accessible in accordance with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 Level AA standard in the university setting.

 Make existing web pages and materials created since 2010 accessible.  The agreement also requires the university to train its instructors and administrators on the requirements of the ADA.  $23,543 in damages for the student from the university and the Board.

OCR review of websites found they do not permit a person with a visual impairment or other print-related disability to use the websites operated by SCTCS, HGTC, or FDTC in an equally effective and equally integrated manner as someone without a disability.

 All college and system office web sites…shall be designed to be accessible, so that people with disabilities have access to online information, data, and services comparable to that accorded to individuals who do not have disabilities.  Web Developers designing Web content for all official Web pages must consider accessibility issues during initial development. For all new Web pages and revisions to currently used Web pages, Web Developers must follow the minimum standards listed below.

 All colleges and the system office shall follow the standards established under Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, amended in 1998 by the Work Force Investment Act (Section and its subsequent amendments), as their minimum requirements for Web accessibility.  It is recommended that all colleges and the System Office also follow the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines established by the World Wide Web Consortium’s Web Accessibility Initiative (W3C-WAI) that are not addressed in Section 508. Each college and the system office may develop more specific guidelines for dealing with web accessibility in accordance with Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act as well as the World Wide Web Consortium’s Web Accessibility Initiative (W3C-WAI).

Based upon the review of the websites and interviews with the staff and students, OCR determined that a number of the aspects of the websites are not fully compliant with the Section 508 standards (while Section 508 standards apply to the federal government, SCTCS -- through Policy # chose to adopt them system-wide as a means to ensure accessibility) and are not generally accessible.

 PDF files missing tagging, alternative text for graphics, identification on column headers, specified reading order, and tags on critical information such as watermarks and headings.  Videos were without proper labeling, keyboard control, or captioning.  Alternative attributes were insufficient or missing and fields which required filling out were missing labels to enable a screen reader user to fill them in.  Tables were missing headings for a screen reader to fully access them. OCR found several different areas where a keyboard-only user would not be able to access information or use drop down menus.  Content in course management systems was missing captions, alternative texts, and other features required for accessibility.  Campus calendars were not fully accessible to a screen reader.

“‘Accessible’ means a person with a disability is afforded the opportunity to acquire the same information, engage in the same interactions, and enjoy the same services as a person without a disability in an equally effective and equally integrated manner, with substantially equivalent ease of use. The person with a disability must be able to obtain the information as fully, equally and independently as a person without a disability. Although this might not result in identical ease of use compared to that of persons without disabilities, it still must ensure equal opportunity to the educational benefits and opportunities afforded by the technology and equal treatment in the use of such technology.”

Disability Rights Advocates represented three UC Berkeley students with print disabilities who experienced barriers in receiving instructional materials in alternative formats.

 Establishes clear timelines and responsibilities for producing accessible alternatives including faculty selecting material, students requesting alternatives, and production by disability resources.  Students who request course materials in alternative media can now expect to receive textbooks in 10 business days and course readers in 17 business days.  Portions of materials requested on an expedited basis will be provided with shorter turnaround times.

 Created and implemented a new Library print conversion system, the first of its kind in the nation, to enable students with print disabilities to request that a specific library book or journal be converted into an accessible digital format, with an average turnaround time of five business days.  Undertake efforts to encourage instructors to identify the course readings well before the start of classes. When the instructors meet these deadlines, print disabled students will be able to obtain complete accessible versions of the materials at least three days before classes start.

 Implement a system to provide personal readers to students upon request when the student is unable to obtain the accessible version of print material in time to keep up with course assignments.  Students can now get materials listed by a Professor as recommended reading converted into fully accessible materials.  Implement a variety of scanning machines to allow students to self-scan materials into a variety of accessible digital formats. Agreed to provide assistance to students with physical disabilities that preclude them from using self-scanning machines independently.  Agreed to remedy existing barriers in its online library catalogue system so that students can access that system using their screen reader software programs.

 Provide equally effective access to programs, benefits and services for qualified individuals with disabilities in the most integrated manner possible.  The goal is increased independence for people with disabilities through accessible technology.  Means a person with a disability must be able to  Acquire the same information;  Engage in the same interactions; and  Enjoy the same benefits.

 Every program and activity is covered.  Academic and nonacademic, onsite and offsite, those receiving significant assistance.  Saving grace: modifications and auxiliary aids and services are not required if they would fundamentally alter the program or conflict with essential program requirements.

Access to technology is an institution wide issue. It comprises all of the means and methods in which we employ technology in delivering our services, opportunities and benefits. Access to technology for individuals with disabilities cannot be limited to a consideration of adaptive/assistive technology offered as an academic adjustment for students with disabilities and/or the specific accommodations offered to individual employees  Access to technology is an institution wide issue. It comprises all of the means and methods in which we employ technology in delivering our services, opportunities and benefits.  Access to technology for individuals with disabilities cannot be limited to a consideration of adaptive/assistive technology offered as an academic adjustment for students with disabilities and/or the specific accommodations offered to individual employees.

 We need to foster ownership of accessibility throughout the University amongst all stakeholders to ensure that accessibility is designed into University operations, rather than addressed by Disability Services through individualized accommodations.  Should be a joint mission of Provost, VP for Equity and Diversity, and OIT.  Enforcement is critical.  South Carolina Tech had a policy; problem is it wasn’t followed.  Cannot leave it up to individual departments or units.

 Review our current use of technology, web based tools, and information for accessibility.  Develop a strategic plan for access that is integrated with our overall technology plan and includes time frames for replacing inaccessible technology and opportunities to reprioritize based on ongoing feedback from students with print disabilities.  Identify workarounds, accommodations, and supports, including the use of readers/scribes when no alternative will work to address short term gaps.  Schedule and conduct regular audits.

 Functional standard for access identified (substantially equivalent ease of use in the same place and at the same time as other students).  Technical standard for access identified: WCAG2.0 AA standard (Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act or Web Content Accessibility Guidelines provide good benchmarks).  Accessibility to be provided within 10 days.  Each site to include method of contact for those having difficulty accessing.  Clarify alternative media responsibilities and time lines.

 Create ADA responsibility guidelines for administrators, department chairs and faculty.  Roles and responsibilities.  Functional guidelines for faculty. Learning characteristics of LD and ADHD students. Types of accommodations that will be provided. Best Instructional Practices. Confidentiality. Working with non-native speakers. Model Universal Design for Instructional Syllabi.

 ADA Law and application to Higher Education.  Definitions and characteristics of various types of disabilities.  University Policies and Procedures.  Academic Accommodations.  Rights and Responsibilities of Faculty, Staff Department. Chairs and Students.  Role of Disability Services.  Utilize a video format similar to our HIPPA and EOAA training modules.

 We should not enter into agreements with third parties providing for the delivery of services, programs and/or opportunities to our students, program beneficiaries and employees without investigating the degree of access afforded individuals with disabilities.  We should be assured either that there is full accessibility or that alternatives means of providing access are available that would provide individuals with disabilities the ability to acquire the same information, engage in the same interactions, and enjoy the same services with substantially the same ease of use.